Fuel moving to a 29in wheel

Heard a rumor so I put no faith in it but I wanted to hear what everyone else thought. I was at a trail riding my non-Trek bike when a guy asked me what I thought about the 29er with full suspension. He was looking for a trail bike and was used to 26in wheels. We talked and I had mentioned that I looked at a Rumblefish but decided on a longer travel bike. He casually mentioned that he heard the Fuel was going to 29er. Anybody else hear this or have thoughts?

Fuel moving to a 29in wheel

have also heard that the EX will be getting a 29 version with full floater, and would be shocked if it did not since the women's Lush 29er for 2013 sports the full floater design. heard all this from someone who would seemingly know.
Heard actually that Trek plans to introduce several new frame platforms in the MTB realm, two of which I'd imagine will be the Superfly SL frames, since those haven't really had a big press push until recently...so a couple new bikes coming down the pike I'd think.

I have a 9.9SSL Top Fuel, and while I am riding a 29er hardtail currrently, I have to say that I think that bike worked pretty good. The rear wheel stayed stuck to the ground. It took some getting used to, coming off a 26"HT, but it was, and is a pretty damned good bike. The only gripes I had about it was the wheelbase and the head angle. I think it could have been a touch shorter in the wheelbase and the headtube was a half degree to a degree too slack. I think speeding up the headangle would have helped shorten the wheelbase a little. To each their own though.

No.
The SF and the Rumblefish are built on the same suspension platform.
The SF has a horizontal shock whereas the Fuel is a vertical full floater style.
New bike that's rumored and talked about in this thread is a 29er with vertical, full floater style suspension.

What I love about Trek is how close they keep their dealers. My LBS said the rep. confirmed that the new "rumor" bike is basically a Lush for men. Apparently Trek wanted to test the platform first with a women's model. He wasn't sure if the RF was going away or if they would keep it as a middle-of-the-road trail bike and maybe drop some of the AL SF models (but keep the carbon around).

I'm waiting to see what they come out with. I've got a 2013 Superfly Al. Pro that I love but I want something beefier for epics and enduros. Waiting to see if this new bike is worth full retail or if I'm better off snagging a RF once if/when it's been displaced.

Funny this is mentioned. I was looking at stump jumpers just a few minutes ago. Specialized offers the stumpy in 26 and 29. Maybe trek will follow suit? Maybe it will be a 27.5" instead. Notice how the bottom tube on the 2013 Fuel has a slight bend to it. Maybe to accomidate a larger wheel? I could see the rumblefish going away and offering the Fuel in 2 wheel sizes. I am really concidering a 29er not sure if it will be a HT or FS. I will probably wait until the 2014's are released.

Owning a RF currently along with 2 FuelEX 8's and 2 Fuel 90's previously, if Trek were to create a new Fuel 29'r or 650b I'd drop the RF like a bad habit. If they made a FuelEX 29'r I'd be less inclined to swap, but still tempted if it rode more similarly to the original Fuel. The longer I own the Rumblefish, the less I enjoy it. I have the option of the Rumblefish or my Salsa El Mariachi SS and the Salsa gets more ride time.

The original Fuel (2001) was an 80mm travel suspension design, not the 100mm it morphed into. If I remember correctly, the 1st gen (2005?) FuelEX was a 100mm design that turned into 120mm when the standard Fuel turned into 100mm. I was quite happy with the 80mm original fuel and when the travel increased to 100mm it was still good, but once the travel moved on up to 120mm it just felt sloppy to me.

Where I ride, I don't feel the need for more than 100mm and never bottom forks or shocks out unless they are short a few PSI.

The only fucntional difference between "full floater" (top fuel, EX) vs a fixed shock mounting (rumbelfish, sf100)... is the engineer's/designer's ability to more finely tune the shock rate. the need to quickly release a 100mm 29er race bike with full floater would imply that the shock rate of the SF100 and SF100 SL is inadequate... considering their newly released SF100SL has hardly hit shop floors, I doubt another 100mm 29er race bike redesign is coming anytime soon.

Now, a 120-140mm travel 29er "trail" bike (carbon)... that might be nice, and may very well use full floater.

IMHO, DRCV shocks and the ABP rear end are much more significant factors in ride quality than whether a shock mount is "full floater".

From what I have heard the Rumblefish is going to have the same full floater design as the Fuel. Which would be the 29er Fuel. I am not sure if the 26 will be replaced with a 27.5 but to me that kind of makes sense.

I don't expect Trek will put another XC 29er Full Suspension in the market. Their 29er XC bikes have just been revised in 2013.

But for the AM market, and especially the increasingly popular long travel range, they don´t have anything to show for. The Rumblefish is still a great bike, but has been around since 2010, still a real "Fish" back then. And with more competition moving in to the LT-AM market as well. Trek can not afford not to offer a 29er in that range.

If I´m correct the Fuel EX is still one of their best selling bikes. So it should not be a surprise if they use that platform and create a 29er version of that bike to update their AM line-up.

Went to my LBS they were building up an Fuel EX8 29er for me to look at and judge the geometry if its right for me or not. Its an 18.5. Was really interested in the EX9 but they didnt get any in my size range.

Pretty significant jump in price from the EX8 to the EX9. But computer checked that Trek wont have any till mid to late July. I can suffice with SLX on the EX8 although Id like to swap out the triple with an SLX double and Ive got a set of Stans Flows/American Classic wheels from my current bike that Id swap over.

Guess what Im really thinking out loud is should I wait for the EX9 to become available or go EX8? Would I be missing the Kashima coating (is it worth it?) on the fork and shock and dropper seatpost? Never used one before.

Went to my LBS they were building up an Fuel EX8 29er for me to look at and judge the geometry if its right for me or not. Its an 18.5. Was really interested in the EX9 but they didnt get any in my size range.

Pretty significant jump in price from the EX8 to the EX9. But computer checked that Trek wont have any till mid to late July. I can suffice with SLX on the EX8 although Id like to swap out the triple with an SLX double and Ive got a set of Stans Flows/American Classic wheels from my current bike that Id swap over.

Guess what Im really thinking out loud is should I wait for the EX9 to become available or go EX8? Would I be missing the Kashima coating (is it worth it?) on the fork and shock and dropper seatpost? Never used one before.

Dropper post is relitive to what kind of terrain you ride. I have used one but dont have a need or want for one.

If I was to go with the EX8 since it comes with a triple and wanted to replace it with an SLX or XT double specific would I be able to just buy a double crankset and reuse the existing BB? I would prob think that spacers would be needed to get the chainline straight, no?

Went to my LBS they were building up an Fuel EX8 29er for me to look at and judge the geometry if its right for me or not. Its an 18.5. Was really interested in the EX9 but they didnt get any in my size range.

Pretty significant jump in price from the EX8 to the EX9. But computer checked that Trek wont have any till mid to late July. I can suffice with SLX on the EX8 although Id like to swap out the triple with an SLX double and Ive got a set of Stans Flows/American Classic wheels from my current bike that Id swap over.

Guess what Im really thinking out loud is should I wait for the EX9 to become available or go EX8? Would I be missing the Kashima coating (is it worth it?) on the fork and shock and dropper seatpost? Never used one before.

Kashima is nice, but the ones without it work fine, so I don't think that is a dealbreaker. IMO, you have to have a dropper on a bike like that, but the 8 not coming with one gives you the option to pick your own, so probably better anyway.

If I was to go with the EX8 since it comes with a triple and wanted to replace it with an SLX or XT double specific would I be able to just buy a double crankset and reuse the existing BB? I would prob think that spacers would be needed to get the chainline straight, no?

You should just be able to slap it on, no spacers or etc. needed. If you wanted to run a SRAM crank it might require a different press-fit BB? but the Shimano should slap right on. The rings of a 2x and a 3x are offset differently -- the chainline differences you reference are handled by the spider/drive side arm. The front shifter and derailleur are 2 or 3-speed specific, but you can limit a 3x front setup and it works fine.

went back to my shop. was able to test ride the EX8 18.5 and it felt just a little too short in the TT. I realize its got an 80mm stem, Ive got a 100mm Thomson on my Niner that I could swap out. They were kind enough to order one of the last 19.5 for me. Should be here this weekend so I could do a side by side comparison.

Other than that it a pretty nice riding bike. Suspension soaked up the small stairs to off the curb. And peddles quite well up hill in the middle ring.